Gergiev Writes Letter to Munich Subscribers-NYT

[maestrob]

Valery Gergiev, the conductor whose ties to President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia have sparked protests at his performances in the West — over gay rights in Russia and the Ukraine crisis — wrote a letter on Tuesday seeking to explain himself to subscribers of the Munich Philharmonic, the orchestra he is set to take over as music director in 2015-16.

“I am a musician and conductor,” he wrote in a letter he described as a personal statement. “However, I am also a Russian citizen with close connections to my native country.”

Mr. Gergiev, the head of the Mariinsky Theater in St. Petersburg, recently met with Munich cultural officials and orchestra officials to discuss several things, including the situation in Ukraine and how he might work with gays and lesbians in Munich. He then wrote the letter to the orchestra’s subscribers, in which he said that music could be a “bridge-builder,” and sought to explain his background. “I cannot ignore the fact that parts of Russian society live according to fundamental principles that are different from those of Western societies,” he said.

Mr. Gergiev, who recently signed a petition hailing Mr. Putin’s annexation of Crimea, referred to recent events as “new rifts between East and West that are distressing to all of us,” but did not clarify his political views.

In a section of the letter that seemed to allude to the controversy over Russian legislation putting restraints on the discussion of homosexuality, Mr. Gergiev wrote about the importance of the Russian Orthodox Church, and its traditions.

“I respect my people and their traditions,” he wrote. “I also respect the principles of life that are extremely important to the people of Russia. These include upholding taboos that have not applied in Western countries for many years, but where many attempts and much time was needed to abolish them. With respect to my personal stance, there is no one in my ensemble and team who could accuse me of anything. One of my most important principles is respect for others and their personal lives.”

The letter was the latest attempt by Mr. Gergiev to try to reassure people in Munich before he becomes the Philharmonic’s music director in 2015. In December he assured Munich officials that he supported the city’s anti-discrimination laws.

http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/ ... /?ref=arts

[SONNET CLV]

Does this mean Gergiev will be championing the three Ned Rorem symphonies? Great! He's already done a masterful job with the complete symphonies of his fellow citizen Tchaikovsky, especially the first three. I'd like to hear him take on Copland, Poulenc, and Britten, too.

[John F]

Does this mean Gergiev will be championing the three Ned Rorem symphonies?

Not in Munich, I wouldn't think.

[jbuck919]

Does this mean Gergiev will be championing the three Ned Rorem symphonies? Great! He's already done a masterful job with the complete symphonies of his fellow citizen Tchaikovsky, especially the first three. I'd like to hear him take on Copland, Poulenc, and Britten, too.

I'd like him to stop openly defending his country's backwardness.

[John F]

At least he admits it, which is kind of remarkable. He himself is, of course, far more cosmopolitan than most of his countrymen.

[Len_Z]

Of course, he performs Tchaikovsky - according to the new Russian official party line, poor Petr Ilyich was not gay, but simply asexual, so there's no shame in playing his music

In all fairness, it should be noted that Gergiev has performed and even recorded Szymanowski symphonies with LSO.

In my book, though, it's not enough to excuse his pro-Putin stance.

[barney]

I agree. We had strong discussion about that at the time of the Georgian crisis, where - in my view- Gergiev was equally political and sycophantic. But mine was definitely a minority position. If he's such an ardent nationalist let him bring the Irkutsk Philharmonic (or whatever) up to scratch and work to improve Russia. He swans around having the best of both worlds, which I find somewhat contemptible.
However, he is a damn fine conductor.

[Tarantella]

I agree. We had strong discussion about that at the time of the Georgian crisis, where - in my view- Gergiev was equally political and sycophantic. But mine was definitely a minority position. If he's such an ardent nationalist let him bring the Irkutsk Philharmonic (or whatever) up to scratch and work to improve Russia. He swans around having the best of both worlds, which I find somewhat contemptible.
However, he is a damn fine conductor.

And he's coming to Sydney in November with the LSO. I saw Gergeiv conduct in Vienna and he was in fine form (and he's rather sexy with it!).

[Chalkperson]

I agree. We had strong discussion about that at the time of the Georgian crisis, where - in my view- Gergiev was equally political and sycophantic. But mine was definitely a minority position. If he's such an ardent nationalist let him bring the Irkutsk Philharmonic (or whatever) up to scratch and work to improve Russia. He swans around having the best of both worlds, which I find somewhat contemptible.
However, he is a damn fine conductor.

And he's coming to Sydney in November with the LSO. I saw Gergeiv conduct in Vienna and he was in fine form (and he's rather sexy with it!).

I saw Gergiev conduct twice, the first time he gave a very average performance of two Shostakovich Symphonies, the second time he contacted The Nose.

As he was in the pit at the Met for The Nose and thus hardly seen he wore no jacket, in fact he could not even be bothered to tuck in his black shirt, he looked sloppy, and certainly not sexy.

And that's how I find him, heavily over extended work wise, and sycophantic to his long time friend Vlad the Bad. He acts like an aristocrat, it's a shame the French Revolution is still not happening, he'd be my first candidate for a date with Madame Guillotine...

[Chalkperson]

Posted in wrong thread...

[karlhenning]

. . . the second time he contacted The Nose.

You know I mean nothing snarkish, when I express appreciation of this typo, dear fellow.

Cheers,
~Karl

[karlhenning]

Does this mean Gergiev will be championing the three Ned Rorem symphonies? Great! He's already done a masterful job with the complete symphonies of his fellow citizen Tchaikovsky, especially the first three. I'd like to hear him take on Copland, Poulenc, and Britten, too.

I'd like him to stop openly defending his country's backwardness.

Well, and when Moscow sent Shostakovich to the US in the sort of "cultural embassage" which cannot have afforded him a moment's pleasure, Western journos would have liked him to back-pedal the absurd things he had had to say about Western music.

The situation is not quite the same, in many particulars. But it is a fundamental error, still, to suppose that Russian artists (even now) enjoy the same freedom of conscience we do in the West.

In a sense, I strongly agree with you, John: I wish there had been the fundamental change in Russian society which would make it practical for a Russian artist to take a stand against the mediæval government.

Cheers,
~Karl

[John F]

It is not a requirement of artists that they be politically liberal or politically correct or politically anything.

[karlhenning]

This, too, is true.

Cheers,
~Karl

[maestrob]

Toscanini stood strong against Fascism and Nazism, why should Gergiev get away with his apologia for Putinism?

I disagree with JohnF: I think it is necessary for artists to stand up for human rights. It is, after all, the human public that makes possible their success.

Many Russian artists faced the same conundrum during Soviet times, and ended up emigrating to the west (Rostropovich, Stravinsky, Feltsman), why shouldn't Gergiev take a similar stand?

[Tarantella]

I enjoyed Gergiev's conducting of the Vienna Philharmonic in 2011 and I look forward to seeing him again when we return for the 14/15 season. He certainly does not deserve the guillotine or any other such gratuitous violence.

As to politics and the artist; this is a very fraught issue and I think we cannot really empathize or make judgments from the comfortable distance of our vigorous democracies. One thing I've learned about being an Australian abroad is that there is a connection to "home" which is inexorable and compelling, no matter how much we find fault with or attempt to objectify our country of birth.

I learned, to my surprise, from Jonathon Dimbleby's excellent series on 'Russia' that a vast number of the Russian people are complacent about Putin and are prepared to passively watch Russian 'democracy' unravel.

[Chalkperson]

I enjoyed Gergiev's conducting of the Vienna Philharmonic in 2011 and I look forward to seeing him again when we return for the 14/15 season. He certainly does not deserve the guillotine or any other such gratuitous violence

.
France stopped using the guillotine in 1979 so my comment must have been meant as facetious, but, this is CMG where black humor is not allowed, sorry, I forgot you have a problem with my occasional moments of unseriousness.

Unfortunately he was not Conducting the Vienna Philharmonic when I saw him, but his recordings and performances have left a lot to be desired in recent years as he takes on yet more responsibilities.

[John F]

Toscanini stood strong against Fascism and Nazism, why should Gergiev get away with his apologia for Putinism?

I disagree with JohnF: I think it is necessary for artists to stand up for human rights. It is, after all, the human public that makes possible their success.

Many Russian artists faced the same conundrum during Soviet times, and ended up emigrating to the west (Rostropovich, Stravinsky, Feltsman), why shouldn't Gergiev take a similar stand?

Why should he? The cases of the three you name were different from each other and radically different from Gergiev's. Most Russian artists did not emigrate - Shostakovich actually joined the Communist Party, and Rostropovich didn't emigrate, he was expelled and his citizenship taken from him. And today's Russia's offenses against human rights are very slight compared with the Soviet Union's. Vladimir Putin is not a dictator but an elected president; when Russia's constitution prevented him from seeking a third consecutive term, he did not seize power but stepped down, then ran again for the office and won yet again when the law permitted him to. Finally, when our president was having prisoners tortured in the name of national security, how many American artists emigrated? Not one that I know of. No, it just won't do.

[karlhenning]

Toscanini stood strong against Fascism and Nazism, why should Gergiev get away with his apologia for Putinism?

You put the question tendentiously, of course. If Gergiev disagrees personally, why should we suppose that he at liberty to "stand strong"? Which relations of Gergiev's do you feel he can reasonably sacrifice, in order that your romantic notion of "standing strong" can be satisfied?

Suppose that Shostakovich had defected while he was on US soil. How safe do you think his wife and son would have been?

Black-&-white won't serve here.

Cheers,
~Karl

[Modernistfan]

I feel that the statements about "freedom of conscience" about people living in the Western democracies are far too smug. I cannot speak for persons outside the United States, but if any American performer or conductor dared to attack the snooping, prying, and spying carried on by the American national security state, publically supported Bradley Manning, Julian Assange, or Edward Snowden, or called for an end to American support of the racist apartheid state of Israel, he or she would most likely not go to jail, but his or her career would vanish in an instant.

[Tarantella]

I feel that the statements about "freedom of conscience" about people living in the Western democracies are far too smug. I cannot speak for persons outside the United States, but if any American performer or conductor dared to attack the snooping, prying, and spying carried on by the American national security state, publically supported Bradley Manning, Julian Assange, or Edward Snowden, or called for an end to American support of the racist apartheid state of Israel, he or she would most likely not go to jail, but his or her career would vanish in an instant.

How does this explain Gore Vidal and Noam Chomsky?

And Chalkie, don't be afraid to say I have absolutely no sense of humour.

[Modernistfan]

It doesn't--they are (or were, in the case of the deceased Gore Vidal) not performers or conductors. They do not or did not have to depend for jobs on administrators or boards of directors of arts institutions totally tied to the status quo, which is to assume that the American empire represents the manifestation of God on earth.

[Tarantella]

It doesn't--they are (or were, in the case of the deceased Gore Vidal) not performers or conductors. They do not or did not have to depend for jobs on administrators or boards of directors of arts institutions totally tied to the status quo, which is to assume that the American empire represents the manifestation of God on earth.

Vidal was a writer and he came from "the establishment". Nevertheless, he was effectively exiled in Italy until he died. Chomsky works, as I understand it, for an American academic institution (or used to) and is therefore tied to the US somewhat 'administratively'. Some of his dissident writings have actually turned my stomach, as they also did to Christopher Hitchens.

I regret to say I didn't know that "the American empire represents the manifestation of God on earth". I didn't know America had "an empire", thinking that the prerogative of pre-war Britain.

But, never mind, this thread is about music. Actually, a better topic might be: "What have been the consequences of 'Empire' for European art music"? That way, we can discuss Gergiev again.

[barney]

It is not a requirement of artists that they be politically liberal or politically correct or politically anything.

Indeed, but nor are they above the requirements of ordinary human decency or morality, as many artists over the centuries have believed. I'm certainly entitled to despise Gergiev's politics, or, in this case, what I see as his hypocrisy.

[barney]

PS, it's interesting that Gergiev felt the need to write the letter that began this thread. It seems he doesn't entirely agree with you, John. Or else no justification would be needed at all.

[Chalkperson]

I feel that the statements about "freedom of conscience" about people living in the Western democracies are far too smug. I cannot speak for persons outside the United States, but if any American performer or conductor dared to attack the snooping, prying, and spying carried on by the American national security state, publically supported Bradley Manning, Julian Assange, or Edward Snowden, or called for an end to American support of the racist apartheid state of Israel, he or she would most likely not go to jail, but his or her career would vanish in an instant.

How does this explain Gore Vidal and Noam Chomsky?

And Chalkie, don't be afraid to say I have absolutely no sense of humour.

I was giving you the benefit of the doubt by suggesting you don't enjoy "Gallows Humor" but if by your own admission you have no sense of humor then you have my sympathy, life without humor is something I would find impossible to bear...

[Tarantella]

That's not what I said!

And yours is a big IF (cough).

[maestrob]

Toscanini stood strong against Fascism and Nazism, why should Gergiev get away with his apologia for Putinism?

You put the question tendentiously, of course. If Gergiev disagrees personally, why should we suppose that he at liberty to "stand strong"? Which relations of Gergiev's do you feel he can reasonably sacrifice, in order that your romantic notion of "standing strong" can be satisfied?

Suppose that Shostakovich had defected while he was on US soil. How safe do you think his wife and son would have been?

Black-&-white won't serve here.

Cheers,
~Karl

Time to prepare a slow and gentle exodus.....?

I understand perfectly well Gergiev's position: that's why he wrote the letter. Looking for middle ground is the objective of a weak heart, trapped by circumstance. I've been there. There's no black & white here, or Romantic positioning. I just think Gergiev could be more forceful in his opinions, more willing to sacrifice his "friendship" with Putin, and should be maneuvering his life so that he can do so.

[John F]

It is not a requirement of artists that they be politically liberal or politically correct or politically anything.

Indeed, but nor are they above the requirements of ordinary human decency or morality, as many artists over the centuries have believed. I'm certainly entitled to despise Gergiev's politics, or, in this case, what I see as his hypocrisy.

What exactly has Valery Gergiev done that is humanly indecent? Not a thing. You are entitled to despise anybody's politics for any reason, good or bad, or no reason in particular, because that's part of what politics is. But nobody but politicians are answerable to you for their politics, as you are not answerable to them.

In writing and publishing the letter, Gergiev has done the humanly decent thing. He had already publicly disassociated himself from homophobia, more than once, and in his letter goes further: "With respect to my personal stance, there is no one in my ensemble and team who could accuse me of anything. One of my most important principles is respect for others and their personal lives.”

PS, it's interesting that Gergiev felt the need to write the letter that began this thread. It seems he doesn't entirely agree with you, John. Or else no justification would be needed at all.

Surely you don't think he wrote the letter from a compelling inner need? It's his response as the incoming chief conductor of the Munich Philharmonic to local pressure, from various groups and parties in Munich including the city council.

http://slippedisc.com/?s=Gergiev&submit=search

As a guest conductor at the Met and elsewhere he was under no such obligation and wrote no such letter.

Here's the full text.

Dear subscribers and friends of the Munich Philharmonic,

The events in and around the Ukraine have been dominating the headlines over the last few weeks, causing new rifts between East and West that are distressing to all of us. I, personally, have also become the subject of accusations and controversial disputes. I would like to take this opportunity to make a personal statement.

I am immensely proud of the fact that I have been appointed by the city of Munich to head the Munich Philharmonic as Music Director in the 2015/16 season. Yet this appointment means much more to me. In my opinion it is based on trust and on the belief that, together, we can and must succeed in upholding this city’s unique musical culture and to guide it into the future. I am fully aware of the magnitude of this task and the responsibility associated with it and my future orchestra. Therefore, I shall do my very best to ensure that our concerts are filled with unforgettable moments.

I am a musician and conductor. However, I am also a Russian citizen with close connections to my native country. For nearly a quarter century I have been in charge of the Mariinsky Theatre in St. Petersburg, one of the world’s most prestigious theatres, home to the the Mariinsky Opera, Ballet and Orchestra. My range of musical activities is not limited to this one post. I have been conducting music in the most important cities around the world for many years and work together with many orchestras and musical colleagues. Music is both my profession and my passion and I have devoted myself to it, heart and soul, from a very early age. I also assumed responsibilities to ensure that the cultural and musical tradition of St. Petersburg continues to blossom.

Future political developements could give rise to problems along the lines of what we are currently experience since some people might interpret my involvement given my nationality. In some countries I am seen as a representative of a “different” society, which does not stand for the values and principles of Western life, or does not advocate for them strongly enough. But is this accurate? After all, our Russian musical culture was Europeanised by Mikhail Glinka and is influenced and shaped, in particular, by the German musical culture. Many people in my native Russia are very well aware of this.

Yet, on the other hand, I cannot ignore the fact that parts of Russian society live according to fundamental principles that are different from those of Western societies. For example, many elements of Russian culture are based on the Russian Orthodox religion and the traditions associated with it which still plays a fundamental role in people’s lifestyles. It is important to recognize that this tradition has helped the Russian population to survive such difficult eras in the twentieth century.

I respect my people and their traditions. I also respect the principles of life that are extremely important to the people of Russia. These include upholding taboos that have not applied in Western countries for many years, but where many attempts and much time was needed to abolish them. With respect to my personal stance, there is no one in my ensemble and team who could accuse me of anything. One of my most important principles is respect for others and their personal lives.

Of course, I am aware that my work, my initiative and my commitment – to the extent that music has an influence on everyday life – demand a high degree of responsibility towards my fellow citizens and at times these functions can be construed in a political nature. Nevertheless, I aim a continuous believer in music’s power to reinforce societies and their great traditions. That is why it is very important to me to help promote and invigorate educational music programmes.

I know that many colleagues throughout the world support me in my efforts. Yet this can and must not hide the fact that circumstances of Realpolitik can suddenly infiltrate the common ground of our cultural work and cause harsh and jarring discord. In my opinion, it is particularly crucial at times like these to still have the courage to listen to the other side and to exchange opinions. Moreover, we should not lose respect for each other and never allow for communication to breakdown. We should always be able to exchange thoughts and ideas.

It might sound banal, which does not make it wrong, in fact, quite the opposite is true in my experience: Music is the best bridge-builder!

I look forward to welcoming you to many concerts, perhaps as early as July as the Munich Philharmonic and Marinsky Orchestra complete their Strawinsky Cycle

Yours sincerely,

Valery Gergiev

[Tarantella]

Don't forget there are already sensitivities between Russia and Germany, going back as recently as 1989.

History. Context.

I think Gergiev has done the right thing. Now, what about Lang Lang?

[jbuck919]

Don't forget there are already sensitivities between Russia and Germany, going back as recently as 1989.

And reflected in modern developments like the Seven Years' War.

[John F]

Within living memory, a German government tried to exterminate homosexuals along with Jews, gypsies, and others.

[barney]

JohnF wrote: What exactly has Valery Gergiev done that is humanly indecent? Not a thing. You are entitled to despise anybody's politics for any reason, good or bad, or no reason in particular, because that's part of what politics is. But nobody but politicians are answerable to you for their politics, as you are not answerable to them.

My answer is that I see this as an ethical issue, not merely political. I think Gergiev exploits Russian nationalism,but ignores it the second he departs the country, whereupon he becomes a liberal Westerner. I don't know how honest each of these positions is. If he were the sort of Putin-supporting nationalist who wants to improve the cultural life of Russians, he would stay and build.

And I haven't suggested Gergiev is answerable to me. I am sure that my opinions are a matter of supreme indifference to him, and fair enough too. But I maintain my opinions are reasonable in the face of the evidence. Happy, as with Tarantella on another thread, for you to be wrong.
Just kidding.

[John F]

My answer is that I see this as an ethical issue, not merely political. I think Gergiev exploits Russian nationalism, but ignores it the second he departs the country, whereupon he becomes a liberal Westerner. I don't know how honest each of these positions is. If he were the sort of Putin-supporting nationalist who wants to improve the cultural life of Russians, he would stay and build.

So it's not about human decency, then, but what you think of as intellectual honesty. Fair enough, if you really think so. But now you're prescribing how he ought to live his life. Gergiev has indeed done a great deal to improve the cultural life of Russians, and he's still doing it; wherever he goes and whatever he does, he remains the head of his country's leading opera and ballet theatre, which he's brought to that stature passing the Bolshoi, and to which he always returns.

What you're saying, in effect, is that he should do nothing else - that he should either renounce his feelings for his own country or else remain within a self-imposed iron curtain between Russia and the rest of the world. This is the obverse of a discredited American right-wing slogan during the anti-war demonstrations of the '60s: "America - love it or leave it." If Gergiev did what you say he should, that would deprive us of his talent and, no doubt, the talents of the Russian ensembles he leads on tours abroad, which wouldn't be happening without him. And it would deprive him and them of the opportunities for cultural enrichment and growth that comes from traveling and working in other countries as well as home.

I can't read Gergiev's mind but I bet that working in the Netherlands, the United States, England, and elsewhere have given him a more complex and nuanced world outlook than if he had never left Russia. His open letter to the Munich subscribers shows this, at least to me. Not that it really matters to me, all I care about is his music-making, some of the finest we have today. But clearly it matters to you, more perhaps than his music-making does.

[SONNET CLV]

I can't read Gergiev's mind but I bet that working in the Netherlands, the United States, England, and elsewhere have given him a more complex and nuanced world outlook than if he had never left Russia. His open letter to the Munich subscribers shows this, at least to me. Not that it really matters to me, all I care about is his music-making, some of the finest we have today. But clearly it matters to you, more perhaps than his music-making does.

This remains a great conundrum in art: how do we separate the artist from his work? And should we? And, does it essentially matter one way or another?

I reflect upon this after re-reading "The Monster" by Deems Taylor, that wonderful essay about composer Richard Wagner. (I'm sure all of you know the piece.) You can access it here: http://www.counter-currents.com/2013/05/the-monster/

Too, my reflections are currently colored from my recent reading of The Sociopath Next Door by Martha Stout.



It seems clear to me that Wagner meets the criteria of a sociopath, and Taylor well lays out the argument to support that. Though Taylor ignores Wagner's anti-Semitism (an element that will only increase one's distaste for the man Richard Wagner), in the end Taylor concludes: "the curious thing about this record is that it doesn’t matter in the least."

Indeed. I note on this forum what appears to be a great admiration for the music of Richard Wagner. I assume that all you who do so admire it also know something of the man's biography. Do you say with Deems Taylor, "it doesn't matter in the least"? Or does it matter?

If the focus is now Gergiev, we face a similar issue of the value of the artist v. the value of his art. It's interesting that we make such judgments about our contemporaries or those of recent history (Wagner, Toscanini, Rostropovich, Stravinsky, Feltsman, Vidal, Chomsky...) but we can still make judgments about the quality of art by artists who remain completely unknown to us.

For instance, we recognize the greatness of the Greek statue Diskobolus , yet we know essentially little about Myron (Even if he was indeed the sculptor!). Was he a sociopath? Did he hate women? Was he anti-democracy (as was, say, Socrates)? Was he "a monster"? There are many cases of Anonymous works in music, painting, literature where we judge the greatness of the art without any knowledge of the artist. One wonders why we can't assume such a stance when the artist is known. Does knowing the moral positions of the artist fundamentally change our designations of the quality of his art? Should it?

I am not insisting that one way or another is the proper approach, or even that there is a proper approach. Just that this remains a complicated issue, a conundrum as I implied above. How do we fairly assess art? That remains the essential question.

Years from now, when one reviews the history of 20th-21st century recorded art music, will the legacy of Gergiev's art prove its worth aside from any knowledge of the man himself? Or will that art be judged only by the course that Russia takes in the coming years?

[jbuck919]

Was he anti-democracy (as was, say, Socrates)?

I think it's more like democracy was anti-Socrates. (I know you are referring to The Republic, but at that stage I doubt that we are any longer reading anything resembling a transcription of a real Socratic discourse but are instead deeply inside the head of Plato as independent philosopher.)

[John F]

we recognize the greatness of the Greek statue Diskobolus, yet we know essentially little about Myron (Even if he was indeed the sculptor!). Was he a sociopath? Did he hate women? Was he anti-democracy (as was, say, Socrates)? Was he "a monster"? There are many cases of Anonymous works in music, painting, literature where we judge the greatness of the art without any knowledge of the artist. One wonders why we can't assume such a stance when the artist is known. Does knowing the moral positions of the artist fundamentally change our designations of the quality of his art? Should it?

Here's another case in point. Have a look at this watercolor.



Can you guess anything about the character of the painter just from the picture? Now I'll identify the painter: Adolf Hitler. Can you tell anything at all about the picture from knowing who painted it?

[Tarantella]

This has evolved into such an interesting discussion!! Our intelligent contributors are people with sharp minds, unafraid to express their strong opinions in revealing themselves and their values. I love that.

JohnF's watercolour by Hitler provocatively raises the stakes on the argument of the artist versus the art.

For me, knowing that the painting was done by Hitler causes me to search for any hidden meaning/agenda in the art which I might not otherwise have done. In short, the context of its painting informs my response. Similarly, if I knew that an artist had suffered - was ill, handicapped or persecuted - I might look more sympathetically at that art.

That Gergeiv is Russian adds to his mystery and appeal; that he is not a dissident is of no consequence to me. If he were a mere sycophant who pushed the party line - in short, a propagandist - I know I'd feel very differently. I see no evidence that this is the case.

[barney]

My answer is that I see this as an ethical issue, not merely political. I think Gergiev exploits Russian nationalism, but ignores it the second he departs the country, whereupon he becomes a liberal Westerner. I don't know how honest each of these positions is. If he were the sort of Putin-supporting nationalist who wants to improve the cultural life of Russians, he would stay and build.

So it's not about human decency, then, but what you think of as intellectual honesty. Fair enough, if you really think so. But now you're prescribing how he ought to live his life. Gergiev has indeed done a great deal to improve the cultural life of Russians, and he's still doing it; wherever he goes and whatever he does, he remains the head of his country's leading opera and ballet theatre, which he's brought to that stature passing the Bolshoi, and to which he always returns.

What you're saying, in effect, is that he should do nothing else - that he should either renounce his feelings for his own country or else remain within a self-imposed iron curtain between Russia and the rest of the world. This is the obverse of a discredited American right-wing slogan during the anti-war demonstrations of the '60s: "America - love it or leave it." If Gergiev did what you say he should, that would deprive us of his talent and, no doubt, the talents of the Russian ensembles he leads on tours abroad, which wouldn't be happening without him. And it would deprive him and them of the opportunities for cultural enrichment and growth that comes from traveling and working in other countries as well as home.

I can't read Gergiev's mind but I bet that working in the Netherlands, the United States, England, and elsewhere have given him a more complex and nuanced world outlook than if he had never left Russia. His open letter to the Munich subscribers shows this, at least to me. Not that it really matters to me, all I care about is his music-making, some of the finest we have today. But clearly it matters to you, more perhaps than his music-making does.

No, I admire his music making, and distaste for his political opinions does not blind me to his fine qualities as a conductor. I don't admire everything he does. He's not as objectionable, say, as Karl Bohm, many of whose recordings I treasure. I definitely don't think "America (or wherever), love it or leave it." Nor am I prescribing how he should live his life; I have no desire to do that. I am noting what I consider - but you do not - a certain level of hypocrisy which I despise - but you do not. I am very happy to accept that you have reached your position through rational thinking based on sound propositions, and feel no need to convince you. Possibly that's because I simply don't care enough about it. I feel you are according me a stronger position than I want to espouse, though that may well be my own fault through fairly intemperate language.

[barney]

This has evolved into such an interesting discussion!! Our intelligent contributors are people with sharp minds, unafraid to express their strong opinions in revealing themselves and their values. I love that.

JohnF's watercolour by Hitler provocatively raises the stakes on the argument of the artist versus the art.

For me, knowing that the painting was done by Hitler causes me to search for any hidden meaning/agenda in the art which I might not otherwise have done. In short, the context of its painting informs my response. Similarly, if I knew that an artist had suffered - was ill, handicapped or persecuted - I might look more sympathetically at that art.

That Gergeiv is Russian adds to his mystery and appeal; that he is not a dissident is of no consequence to me. If he were a mere sycophant who pushed the party line - in short, a propagandist - I know I'd feel very differently. I see no evidence that this is the case.

Again, a perfectly reasonable position. I would argue that there is evidence that he is a propagandist, such as his overt support for the Russian intervention in Georgia a few years ago, when I first had this discussion on CMG. He volunteered a benefit concert and threw his support behind his personal friend Putin. John F and I had the same disagreement then.

[John F]

No, I admire his music making, and distaste for his political opinions does not blind me to his fine qualities as a conductor. I don't admire everything he does. He's not as objectionable, say, as Karl Bohm, many of whose recordings I treasure. I definitely don't think "America (or wherever), love it or leave it." Nor am I prescribing how he should live his life; I have no desire to do that. I am noting what I consider - but you do not - a certain level of hypocrisy which I despise - but you do not.

Just a few words more. What you're complaining about is not what I would call hypocrisy; Gergiev is no Tartuffe. I'd call it diplomacy. And I'll leave it at that.

I feel you are according me a stronger position than I want to espouse, though that may well be my own fault through fairly intemperate language.

Well, you know best what your position is, and if you've said more than you really meant, I've done it too now and then. I think we're adequately clear about that now.

[lennygoran]

JohnF's watercolour by Hitler provocatively raises the stakes on the argument of the artist versus the art.

Sue as an aside there's a show going on right now at NYC's Neue Gallery on 5th Ave right now:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/entertain ... story.html

My feeling is that despite Wagner's anti semitism the operas are superb and I'll continue to go and enjoy them provided they're not ETed too much. Regards, Len

[jbuck919]

Here's another case in point. Have a look at this watercolor.



Can you guess anything about the character of the painter just from the picture? Now I'll identify the painter: Adolf Hitler. Can you tell anything at all about the picture from knowing who painted it?

Sort of reminds me of these:





The first is by Dwight Eisenhower, the second by Winston Churchill.

[lennygoran]

The first is by Dwight Eisenhower, the second by Winston Churchill.

Well let's not forget a more current president! Regards, Len

[karlhenning]

Well let's not forget a more current president! Regards, Len :)

Just a textual question . . . isn't a president either current, or not? Can there be a "more current" president?

Cheers,
~Karl (* fleeing *)

[karlhenning]

(Lucky for me, Len's out in the garden . . . .)

Cheers,
~Karl

[lennygoran]

[quote="karlhenning"isn't a president either current, or not? Can there be a "more current" president?

[/quote]

Karl does Obama do any painting? Regards, Len

[lennygoran]

(Lucky for me, Len's out in the garden . . . .)

Cheers,
~Karl[/color]

Karl you're right-we were out there most of the day--most significant--after admiring them for years in other people's gardens we now have our own tricolor beech in our garden--absolutely superb specimen! Regards, Len

http://www.missouribotanicalgarden.org/ ... rcode=d407

[jbuck919]

isn't a president either current, or not? Can there be a "more current" president?

Karl does Obama do any painting? Regards, Len

Apparently in his youth he used to paint the town red.

[lennygoran]

Apparently in his youth he used to paint the town red.

Still another reason to like the guy! Regards, Len